NON EXECUTING THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER WARRANT FOR EXAMINATION OF EXPERT DUE TO SMAKHYA ANDHRA STRIKE - NOT SUFFICIENT REASON the Supreme Court held: "....When the advocate who was engaged by a party was on strike there is no obligation on the part of the court either to wait or to adjourn the case on that count...." In view of the above noted authoritative pronouncements, irrespective of the cause, the lawyers cannot go on strike. Therefore, the plea that because of the lawyers' strike, the Advocate-Commissioner could not execute warrant cannot be countenanced in law. By staying away from the work, the Court was left with no option other than directing return of the warrant by the Advocate- Commissioner. Therefore, I do not find anything wrong in the approach of the lower Court or any error in the orders passed by it, which are the subject matter of this Civil Revision Petition. If the petitioner has suffered any damage on account of the return of the warrant by the Advocate-Commissioner, he shall be free to claim such damages from his Advocate as well as the Advocate- Commissioner by initiating appropriate proceedings. Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSK LAW REPORTS
NON EXECUTING THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER WARRANT FOR EXAMINATION OF EXPERT DUE TO SMAKHYA ANDHRA STRIKE - NOT SUFFICIENT REASON
the Supreme
Court held:
"....When the advocate who was engaged by a party was on strike there is no
obligation on the part of the court either to wait or to adjourn the case on
that count...."
In view of the above noted authoritative pronouncements, irrespective of
the cause, the lawyers cannot go on strike. Therefore, the plea that because of
the lawyers' strike, the Advocate-Commissioner could not execute warrant cannot
be countenanced in law. By staying away from the work, the Court was left with
no option other than directing return of the warrant by the Advocate-
Commissioner. Therefore, I do not find anything wrong in the approach of the
lower Court or any error in the orders passed by it, which are the subject
matter of this Civil Revision Petition. If the petitioner has suffered any
damage on account of the return of the warrant by the Advocate-Commissioner, he
shall be free to claim such damages from his Advocate as well as the Advocate-
Commissioner by initiating appropriate proceedings.
Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the Civil
Revision Petition is disposed of.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSK LAW REPORTS
the Supreme
Court held:
"....When the advocate who was engaged by a party was on strike there is no
obligation on the part of the court either to wait or to adjourn the case on
that count...."
In view of the above noted authoritative pronouncements, irrespective of
the cause, the lawyers cannot go on strike. Therefore, the plea that because of
the lawyers' strike, the Advocate-Commissioner could not execute warrant cannot
be countenanced in law. By staying away from the work, the Court was left with
no option other than directing return of the warrant by the Advocate-
Commissioner. Therefore, I do not find anything wrong in the approach of the
lower Court or any error in the orders passed by it, which are the subject
matter of this Civil Revision Petition. If the petitioner has suffered any
damage on account of the return of the warrant by the Advocate-Commissioner, he
shall be free to claim such damages from his Advocate as well as the Advocate-
Commissioner by initiating appropriate proceedings.
Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the Civil
Revision Petition is disposed of.-2015 A.P.(2014) MSK LAW REPORTS